« BACK | PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

President Obama Goes on Record Opposing Marbury v. Madison

By: Leon H. Wolf (Diary) | April 2nd, 2012 at 06:26 PM |

RESIZE: AAA

For a guy who graduated from Harvard Law, Barack Obama is not really very well versed on his law or his legal history. Speaking out today about the Supreme Court’s review of Obamacare, Obama offered this stunning and completely ahistorical nugget:

Ultimately, I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected congress.

Look, I’m not here to debate the finer points of Marbury v. Madison with anyone, but the fact remains that since that decision was handed down over 200 years ago, it has not exactly been “unprecedented and extraordinary” for the Supreme Court to overturn laws passed by Congress (no matter the size of the majority). In fact, it happens all the time. That is the entire point of the doctrine of judicial review, first announced in Marbury and affirmed without serious challenge ever since.

I would seriously like to know, and I hope the press gets Obama on the record on this – is it President Obama’s contention that the Supreme Court’s only role in reviewing legislation is to double-check the count on the roll call vote to make sure that a majority in fact voted for the law and to check the President’s signature for possible forgery? Because, I mean, if that’s what we’re going to go back to, I’m open to having that discussion but we are going to have to figure out what to do with several hundred SCOTUS decisions that have taken a decidedly different view.

Of course, in making these comments Obama is exposing himself yet again as a cynical hack who is devoid of anything resembling shame. In 2003, the United States Congress passed the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003 by substantially larger margins than Obamacare. When the Supreme Court refused to strike down this law, which was passed by a “democratically elected Congress,” then-Senator Obama threw an absolute hissy fit about the fact that the Supreme Court had upheld the clear will of Congress (and the vast majority of the American people).

However, when it’s his own legislation at stake, Obama seems suddenly ready to go back and undo pretty much every Supreme Court precedent over the last 200 years in order to strip the Court of their power to rule on any question other than whether the roll call was tallied properly. The most galling thing of all is that if any Republican had said this, the media would be busily trying to paint them as an uneducated rube who was unaware of Marbury v. Madison - when Obama says it, it’s presented as a thoughtful defense of his brilliant law.

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES | LOGIN TO COMMENT | REGISTER TODAY

Tbone

journalists are actually dumber, more ideologically devoid of rational thought and far less educated than he.

This is a strong indictment of journalism as Obama has repeatedly proven himself a semi-literate dullard.

justperhaps45

“Articulate idiot” One who speaks convincingly with great eloquence and insifficient truth about things they do not know. Facts are a troublesome distraction to this person.

Note: quoting one or more other articulate idiots serves as crediable proof for any statement by an AI.

bk

because he HAPPENS to know that the decision is going against him. Gee, I wonder how that could happen….

This whole thing was such a crock today – Is Obama’s argument that the SC should only overturn laws that did not pass Congress? Oh wait, those wouldn’t be laws would they?

swami7774

My guess.

hls87

Except for the cynical hack thing. Obama is actually revealing himself to be a drooling idiot. It isn’t that he doesn’t care about maintaining coherence. He’s just too stupid to do so. He picked Biden as a running mate because he thought Joe was the one guy who wouldn’t make him feel his inadequacy. Turns out even Biden is too smart.

goodgovernance

He’s just desperate. He really doesn’t have a defense against the Supreme Court striking down his law, other than “it was approved by the representatives of the people.”

Obama himself campaigned against the mandate. Then when he got into office he decided to take a complete hands-off approach to the legislation he demanded be enacted yet completely failed to provide any leadership on. What he thought was going to get done before the summer recess of 2009 instead helped spur the creation of the Tea Party and took two years to finally push past the goal line, all while the nation was in economic turmoil.

Some are saying if the Supreme Court overturns Obama’s law, the Left can run on this. But I think it’s obviously a huge, huge, disaster. Our nominee (even Romney, despite his own healthcare record) can turn to Obama in the debates and say, “Mr. President, what else have you accomplished besides this act? This act that as a constitutional law scholar you should have known was unconstitutional from the very start? That you DID know at the start, but forgot once you were in office? Why did you hand the reigns of your administration to Nancy Pelosi for two years while the country needed a leader who could help this nation get back to work? Why, Mr. President?”

funwithknives

From your keyboard, to Mitt’s ears
{ and the GOP’s}
Can we put a head on it, and end with a few of Princess Nancy’s banalisms?
hls87

He’s too stupid to be desperate. He genuinely doesn’t understand how idiotic his remarks were yesterday or the damage he is doing to himself by attacking the Court.

You may also be overestimating the political damage a ruling striking down all or part of Obamacare would do to him. It would be a problem, but also an opportunity. If Obama can go into the fall arguing that the next President and Congress will have to redesign our health care sector yet again and that voters shouldn’t trust a Republican Congress together with a Republican President to do the job, it could help him. Voters tend to like divided government, particularly when there’s anything sensitive on Washington’s agenda.

On the other hand, on the evidence of yesterday, Obama will probably blow the opportunity to benefit from a loss at the S.Ct. by casting himself as an enemy of the Constitution.because he has the IQ of an eggplant. It will be interesting to watch it play out.

funwithknives

It Was about preaching to the choir and advancing anarrative.
Giving supposed talking points to a cadre who actually think that the Gub-mint got’s Money {some-a that Obama Money!} and they really are “here to hep’.. you.”
Speaking in ignorance, to the perpetually ignorant. And public schools make more of them, each and every year.
Is he smart? Nope,he just lives In the Reality he has helped create.
Cagey? Def-In-Et-Ly.
Does he give us the ammunition we use to defeat him with? Each and every time he opens his mouth.{so that would be daily?}

justperhaps45

Biden was not, I think, selected as VP for his comparative brilliance though that is a strong argument. Is it not more logical to surmise that nobody wishing terminal ill to PONTUS Obama would act if PONTUS Biden were to be the outcome? Biden provides greater security than the Secret Service.
justperhaps45

Biden was not, I think, selected as VP for his comparative brilliance though that is a strong argument. Is it not more logical to surmise that nobody wishing terminal ill to PONTUS Obama would act if PONTUS Biden were to be the outcome? Biden provides greater security than the Secret Service.

texashistorian

You have the gist of it! The idea is to select someone who is so bad that no one will kill you for fear of the other guy becoming President*

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

President Obama was the editor of the Harvard Law Review and I’m sure he was on record during that time as supporting Marbury. And I’m equally sure that you’re simply misreading what he said in this case because you’re so obviously a racist. Or something.

Frankly the part I think is funny is this: “…a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected congress.”

As I recall, the only way it became “law” was that it was “deemed” passed because it stood no chance of passing with an up-or-down votes. But then hey, I’m old and my isn’t what it used to be. I think.

http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

the word, anyway…

http://908StraightSt.wordpress.com/ mbecker908

justperhaps45

Ignorance is bliss, you sad soul.
justperhaps45

Ignorance is bliss, you sad soul.

NeoKong

We have already seen his contempt for the court in a SOTU address where he dressed down the SCOTUS right to their face in front of Congress and the nation because of their ruling on Citizens United.
On top of that he has his two little puppets on the court that undoubtedly answer to him and would never vote against him.
Think about that.

He installs a woman on the court who is ruling on legislation that she herself helped to craft.
“After careful review I do not see anything wrong with this law. I love it in fact”.
A little inside baseball anybody…?
The woman was actually coaching the U.S. Solicitor on how to argue it right in front of the court.

It’s undeniable collusion that tramples on the rights of Americans to have cases before the SCOTUS heard in a fair and impartial manner.
Her vote and Sotomayor’s vote were cast before they even took the bench.
When the decisions are predetermined then we have lost our rights as free citizens because one of the checks and balances that protect us has been neutralized.

What is really bugging him is he does not think there is anyone with the authority to overrule him.
I think he actually thinks they should rule in his favor just because it is his legacy and that outweighs everything else.

westcoastpatriette

helping the government prepare for its defense before she was appointed to the Supreme Court. If there were ever a time someone should have recused herself, this is it.

Obama just cannot accept that he is not a dictator and cannot fathom the courts throwing out a law that he considers his pride and joy. What he said today is his way of letting the courts know there will be payback should they strike it down. Exactly what that might be is still a mystery but you can be sure he will be on TV daily excoriating the right-wing activist judges who heartlessly denied free health care to forty million people. How dare they.

davesinsanantonio

he thinks he was elected to be the absolute monarch. After all, he tries to live in the style of Louis XIV by flying off to a dozen vacations a year at taxpayer expense and he gets to live in the executive palace, uh, mansion. And, he demands that Congress pass his law NOW, even though he had not yet submitted it to that Congress. Now he is demanding that the Supreme Court vote the way he instructs them to.
His dream is to be the emperor of the world, and his methods are those of Senator Palpatine. If we don’t do everything in our power to vote him out of office, he too will destroy “the Republic” and rule from the Dark Side.
(And, yes, I know Star Wars was fiction, but it is an apt metaphor for our times.)
shdwolf1

What scares me is that I would not be surprised to hear of a “tragic accident” or “untimely demise” from a heart attack or stroke, of a member of the Supreme Court that would allow Obama to stack the court in his favor.
I also would not be surprised, should he win reelection, if he finds a way to suspend the parts of the constitution that are a hindrance to him achieving his agenda. I would fully expect him to declare that 4 more years is not enough time to “finish what he’s begun”, and he’ll fully throw out the election rules and declare himself our ruler for as long as it takes.
Getting rid of the Supreme Court, Republicans, the rich, and any who would dare oppose his vision; none of these scenarios are hard to imagine like they would have been a few short years ago.

http://www.libertygirlusa.com libertygirlusa

Obama although completely wrong politically, may not be too far off base on Marbury v. Madison. I attended one of the most conservative law school in the nation – George Mason University where we were taught to question the SC’s usurpation of the last arbitrator of Constitutionality. Though there does seem to be some evidence that this was the intent for the Court, the Constitution does not state it and there is as much evidence to the contrary. By deciding the Constitutionality of what the President and Congress do, the SC is actually elevated itself above those branches. I don’t personally believe that was the intent of the Founding Fathers.

Now, I will not defend anything else Obama has to say about the specifics of the decisions, but he is not off base on questioning their “real” power. Gingrich has done the same. So have most of the Conservative Constitutional Lawyers that I know.

westcoastpatriette

but the greater point here is the hypocrisy and inconsistency of Obama’s positions. IOW, when the courts don’t strike down legislation he is in favor of, he throws a fit. So, he’s an equal opportunity critique of the courts depending on the particular case in question and whether he favors it or not.

westcoastpatriette

shoulda said when the courts don’t strike down legislation he is opposed to, he throws a fit. Sorry.
renl57

In the 1960s, the ultra-liberal Earl Warren Supreme Court (6-3 liberal majority) declared numerous Federal and state laws unconstitutional. Griswold v. Connecticut was one of the more notorious ones. Liberals loved that; conservatives hated it.

Not all those rulings had to do with civil rights. In a series of rulings, the Warren Court ruled that congressional districts had to contain roughly equal numbers of voters.

It’s shocking to liberals that a law they got passed could ever be declared unconstitutional.

In the 1960s, some conservatives had “Impeach Earl Warren” bumper stickers. I fully expect to start seeing “Impeach Antonin Scalia” bumper stickers on Priuses.

aesthete

Without judicial review, what is the Supreme Court — and what is its purpose?

AFAICT, judicial review is the most logical of all of the possible powers to delegate to the SC — and you have to delegate some power to it, elsewise it’s just a bunch of old guys sitting around, rather than an independent branch of government.

If the Supremes are going to treat any law as co-equal with the Constitution — then what happens when there is conflict? If you say, “the Constitution should take precedence”, then you’re doing no more than Marshall did.

ohiohistorian

Obama has demonstrated that he doesn’t care a fig for the rule of law. He continues with the CO2 legulation (regulation that is also legislation; something like Brit Hume said this weekend), he sends money to the Arab Spring, he appoints a non-recess recess appointment. What makes you think that the Emperor won’t just tell the SC to stuff it and keep on going the way he wants with his puppet AG and rubber-stamp liberal judges?

FYI, the DHSecurity just let a contract with an order for 450 million hollow point bullets. You want to bet that those show up in the New Black Panther arsenal? He has his “defense force, better funded and armed than the Army”. It is a bunch of black separatists that wear berets and will now carry hollow-point rounds in guns. You should be very afraid.

aesthete

as it would almost certainly guarantee impeachment.

As for the New Black Panther army… I think that’s a very unproductive (and likely inaccurate) avenue for conservatives to explore.
http://www.theantliberalzone.com GunnyG

One, the New Black Panther Party is a bunch of wannabes.

Two, I’ll take my M-1 Garand firing 152 grains of milspec ammo over their pipsqueak .40cal.

Three, the NBPP like Obama, relies on fear to win.

Four, let em bring it on and when the smoke clears, they won’t be the last ones standing.

Lastly, STAND TALL. Guts is everything in this fight.

streiff

that is to actual reality?
jakeofalltrades

It all boils down to this:

1. The Courts are beholden to the Constitution
2. If an issue shows up in court, separation of powers means they will apply the Constitution using their own judgment.

Outside the courtroom, what SCOTUS says has no weight at all. This gives them more power than you might think, because no law can be enforced outside a courtroom. However, it does not give them more power than the founders intended.
demsaresatanic

usurpation. My guess is that the Framers would have been very surprised to see the political branches roll over as they have done.

streiff

and chief justice when Marbury was decided, right?

littlehouse18

but right now they are the only thing standing between us and utter subjugation. How else can we stop an unconstitutional law?

At least they cannot make a law, they can only stop a law from being implemented, by declaring it unconstitutional. This does not elevate them above the other branches, it merely places a check on those branches. Surely you don’t mean to defend the position that Congress can pass any law whatsoever, no matter what burdens it places on the people, or that the President can do whatever he wishes (in effect, despotism)?
deVere

Obviously in deciding cases the Court must give precedence to the constitution over statutes.

Congess has the power to limit the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. If Nancy, Harry, and Barry had had their evil act perfected they would have slipped a clause into their horrible bill prohibiting the Supreme Court from reviewing it. Maybe next time …

davesinsanantonio

that is exactly how lefties think. If they lose this one they will merely try again. And, it may not be “healthcare” that they try it with. They are relentless in their drive to destroy this republic and establish a dictatorship of the progressives. And, they don’t care who they hurt in the doing of it.
So, we must always beware of their goals and methods. If we win this one in the Supreme Court, expect Obummer to try to slip it through by executive fiat. He probably even now had bureaucratic regulators standing by to issue federal requirements to implement whatever the SC throws out.
For them there will always be a “next time”. And, even if they win this one, there will be a next time that will be even worse for the people. “Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom” has never been truer than it is today, because the Left is already on the march towards the next time.

funwithknives

I can only exclaim *YOWZA*< as it sounds really similar to the exhortations of someone I know very well. That'd be me.

The Dialectic, Kids. The Axle upon which the Progressive Wheel turns. Know it and you are always one up.

edintexas

But the argument is about 2 centuries too late. I doubt there will ever be a real challenge to Marbury. Theoretical challenge, but no real challenge to the precedent.

pollywog

AFTER she completes her Obamacare-legal-explanation-presentation to the rest of the justices.

http://UnitedConservativesofVirginia Cargosquid

is when the court rules against you.

I love that Obama “reminds” conservatives about our concerns about judicial activism, ignoring that our concerns are about law-MAKING from the bench…not law-REVIEW.

If the SCOTUS did not strike ACA, but, instead removed only the mandate, and tried to make the rest of the law work without it…THAT would be judicial activism. THEY would be making law.

http://www.helpawhiteguy.com livefreenh

…law-making from the White House. In the list of powers granted to the president in the Const., there are many not listed which Obama enjoys.

The whole idea of a government like this is that we all agree on what government will and will not do, and what The People will and will not do. When someone breaks these rules, something happens to stop it and (we hope) prevent future occurrances.

When a president willfully breaks a sworn oath, and justifying it by claims of a law degree and superiority of opinion over others with law degrees, the lay people ignore the squabble and go back to work, hoping that the big boys will fight it out. But the big boys have no dog in the fight, and Obama wins. This is the Chicago politics way.

The ultimate political anti-bribe is to “rub out” someone. The State can do it after a “fair trial”. But this is one of those things that does not show up in the list at Art II Sec 1.

http://conservativemountaineer.blogspot.com/ conservativemountaineer

someone who is, IMHO, the weakest candidate.. one who is the architect/basis for Obamacare.

Tbone

nt

kipling

Today was day one. He will continue the attacks with “expert” opinions in an attempt to coerce the court or provide cover for the swing votes.

garfieldjl

Seriously, if Obama keeps it up he may end up getting his own appointees to go against him too.

macbookben

…because this ruling is too important for a half-ass majority irrespective of whether the law is upheld or dispatched. We need a shutout.

littlehouse18

It would be nice, but with Kagan there the best we can hope for is 8-1, and that’s only theoretical.

Nothing wrong with 5-4 when it’s doing the right thing.

davesinsanantonio

radicals to campaign on that. A wider decision will at least give us some entertainment value as they try to be creative (that means they will tell lies) about other issues in the election. At least that would be less boring than to hear them whine about the SCOTUS for the whole summer.

acat

Ginsberg spiked Obama’s chance to appoint a third by not retiring despite being almost 80.

If Obama loses 2012 …

Mew

renl57

Over on Slate, Linda Greenhouse fired a pre-emptive shot even before the Supremes heard the case. She said that either the Supremes will vote to uphold the ObamaCare mandate or else this will “prove” that the Supremes are hopelessly partisan.
lineholder

He was the “train wreck” and “plane wreck” announcement journalism dude while the hearing were taking place. Well, just read his comments today….(and I wonder how many liberal judges are doing face palms at the MSM idiocy about now, eh?) Also, it strikes me that the libs would have a better chance of getting their own way if they laid off of Justice Kennedy, but then again that would using prudence and wisdom, and old fashioned stuff like that wouldn’t it?

“For example, the Justices had no trouble upholding the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which used the [Commerce Clause] to mandate the integration of hotels and restaurants. ?It may be argued that Congress could have pursued other methods to eliminate the obstructions it found in interstate commerce caused by racial discrimination,? Justice Tom C. Clark wrote, for his unanimous brethren. ?But this is a matter of policy that rests entirely with the Congress, not with the courts. How obstructions in commerce may be removed?what means are to be employed?is within the sound and exclusive discretion of the Congress.? In other words, Justice Kennedy had it backward. The ?heavy burden? is not on the defenders of the law but on its challengers. Acts of Congress, like the health-care law, are presumed to be constitutional, and it is?or should be?a grave and unusual step for unelected, unaccountable, life-tenured judges to overrule the work of the democratically elected branches of government?

It is simply not the Supreme Court?s business to be making these kinds of judgments. The awesome, and final, powers of the Justices are best exercised sparingly and with restraint. Their normal burdens of interpreting laws are heavy enough. No one expects the Justices to be making health-care policy any more than we expect them to be picking Presidents, which, it may be remembered, is not exactly their strength, either.”

kipling

Do Obama and his allies really want to make this about the Supreme Court? Blatant attacks upon the Supreme Court never really work that well. Often the justices will lay aside ideology to protect their own turf. Obama may drive the decision further against him.

Thanks for the Toobin comments. What a doosy! Bringing up Bush / Gore is just over the top.
Melody Warbington (rwm52)

so much so that people have a bellyful of Obama, the media and their dictatorial attitude. We shouldn’t be surprised by now, but O’s arrogance is just hard to believe.

davesinsanantonio

“a bellyful” of individual responsibility. They would welcome a government that made all their decisions for them, and spoon fed them with healthy fare, and coddled them and told them how unfairly they have been treated by life and those mean rich people.

Remember, “each people gets the government they deserve”. If we are to get a better government we have to work for it, and try to educate those sheep who want to suck from the government teat that they would actually have a more abundant life if they got out and went to work. We cannot sit back and just hope Obummer is turned out of office, but we must work for it. We must donate, get out the vote, educate others and motivate them to do the same.

And, we must get rid of that silly notion that four more years of Obummer would somehow magically make those sheep vote more conservatively next time. Take a clue from what he told the Russians–if he is re-elected, he fully intends to destroy America as we have known it. If he is re-elected there won’t be an America worth saving at the end of his second term. This is our last chance to save the country, so everyone must put his or her wounded pride aside and back Romney and every conservative candidate down ballot to the max. We cannot afford to sit back and let Obummer sneak back into the White House, or we will live to regret it with all our being.

funwithknives

spot on, my friend. {I CAN use that term , can I not?}

I would take exception to one small point. ‘Regret’, would be far too mild a term for your scenario. “..live in abject horror…” has such a nice ring to it. (Jest picking nits )
shadowmane

vis a vis the down ballot. I won’t vote for Romney.

I would love to see the Supreme Court repudiate Obama like he did them in his SOTU Address. I want to see them come out swinging, and name names in their opinion. Of course, they won’t, but it would be nice.
Melody Warbington (rwm52)

if you don’t vote for the GOP nominee in November. I despise Romney as much as anyone here, but if you don’t want to see 2-3 more Kagan’s or Sotomayor’s, you might want to reconsider your position.
adair

when our precinct was far fewer than 1,000 people. At the end of the day when we tallied the votes there were 17 ballots on which neither Johnson nor Goldwater had received a vote.

Many Dems didn’t like LBJ, and many Repubs “wouldn’t vote for Goldwater.” Because the margin was nearly 2-1, at least in our precinct, voting for Goldwater wouldn’t have changed the ultimate outcome. But if he had received more votes it might not have stuck in the brains of the Republican Elites that conservatives can’t win.

Even Reagan’s impressive victories didn’t change their minds.

The Republican voters back then might have had stronger convictions than I do today in withholding their votes; but lately we’ve realized that the lesser of two evils is definitely less evil than the Democrat turns out to be!

DVPTEXFLA

In looking at Wikipedia it seems the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was passed by 85-14 in the senate and 342-67 in the House…and signed by a Democrat named Clinton. Yet I understand a certain President feels “his” Justice Department should not even defend the DOMA. I have the feeling Obama feels the unelected Courts should find DOMA to be….unconstitutional.

We can not make this stuff up. A Constitutional “scholar” huh?
kowalski

All of this is unfolding according to my Master Plan. Muahahahahahahahah.
aesthete

and bet without looking that Obama supported Lawrence v Texas, Roe v Wade, Brown v Board, and a whole litany of court decisions held sacrosanct by the left.

He clearly misspoke. What he meant to say was, “Ultimately, I?m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a majority of a Democrat congress.”

kowalski

By the way, didja see Dionne’s column today at the Washington Post? If you’re careful, you’ll also note that one of the slides in Jonathan Gruber’s presentation I supplied links to at the Boston Globe — was *deleted* between the time I posted those links and today. Specifically, the slide that talked about creating a “functional nongroup insurance market” *vanished* sometime between the time I posted those links and this morning.

The “eat your spinach” panel remains, but the one that talked specifically about a “functional nongroup insurance market” instead of “access to care” up and disappeared. I wonder if they’re going to try to take it out of all the printed copies of the books, too.

kowalski

The architect of the program has been well aware of the potential conflict at the Supreme Court for a very long time, now. In January of 2011 Gruber submitted a PowerPoint presentation concerning the implementation of Obamacare to FamiliesUSA at their “Health Action 2011 Conference”:

http://www.familiesusa.org/conference/health-action-2011/conference-materials.html

Have a look at Slide 26 of the PPT:

http://www.familiesusa.org/conference/health-action-2011/speaker-materials/Gruber-PPT.ppt

One dominant issue: legitimacy of the individual purchase requirement

Massachusetts: Aggressive social marketing

Issue elsewhere: counteradvertising?

Key is to change the culture of insurance ? no one runs counterads against auto insurance

Wild card: The Supremes!
Tbone

about what a dolt he is to say that SCOTUS can’t rule on the constitutionality of laws.

If Romney had a pair, he would be all over this.
belcatar

“The president, adopting what he described as the language of conservatives who fret about judicial activism, questioned how an “unelected group of people” could overturn a law…”

What gall! What arrogance! What insolence! How dare the President lecture ANYONE about unelected people having an impact on laws. Under his watch, the FCC, FDA, HHS, EPA, and just about every other body of unelected officials in the executive branch have been busy making rules that impact every facet of our lives, from the kind of lightbulb we can buy to how internet providers should route traffic on their networks, and they continue to do so even after Congress strikes down the same rules in their own legislation! What utter disregard for an institution he, as a so-called “Constitutional Scholar” should have a deep respect for! How dare he point fingers and play the helpless victim of government overreach!

I will now happily, HAPPILY, I tell you, go to the polls and vote for Mitt Romney. I shall mark my vote joyfully, as a vote against a petty, immature, self-righteous, arrogant, incompetent failure of a President. Next to this man, Romney will be a welcome change.

bus2dc

Actually, a ROCK would be a welcome change. I’d vote for a pineapple. I’d point my finger in the phone book with my eyes closed and pick gleefully. “Unelected officials”????? This is the spin of ALL spin. When you think he just couldn’t possibly top himself. This man is poison. Good thing he also induces instant vomit.

hdandy

between an “activist” court that creates constitutional rights that previously did not exist, or were very well hidden e.g right to privacy, and a court that holds that a law is unconstitutional e.g. the line item veto.
septembergurl

that Obama has received a heads-up on the vote the Supremes took on Friday?

And that it’s very bad for Obamascare?

Otherwise it makes no sense for him to intrude in this way.

acat

…
http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

But Kagan…

uselogic

Thank you, Lindsey Graham.

garfieldjl

http://www.gallup.com/poll/149906/supreme-court-approval-rating-dips.aspx

I don’t think Obama is going to win a slugfest with the Supreme Court, but it will be entertaining to watch him damage his campaign.
bus2dc

Does Obama think another admonition / insult to the Justices will help his mad and hyper-narcissistic quest to shred to the Constitution?

Obama m.o: make a law that breaks the rule of law by utilizing liberal judicial activists legislating from the bench — and then condemn the highest court in the land for restoring the rule of law as judicial activism and legislating from the bench. The rabbit hole is pretty darn deep, isn’t it?
tngal

He’s still miffed over their Citizen’s United ruling, and you know some members of the court haven’t forgotten his public rebuking of them during that state of the union speech.

So now, its war.

“From hell’s heart, I stab at thee. For hate’s sake, I spit my last breath at thee.”

He really plays a good Kahn.
noveldog9

Obama thinks he is the champion of the people and no one should dare challenge him. Well he is not! His word is not law, and Wilson was right when he said, “Mr. President you lie!”

We need to vote for Mitt Romney and as many Republicans as we can. Let’s send those blood sucking Democrats who have been trying to ram ObamaCare down our throats home, or to prison?

Let’s send those suckers home who oppose cheaper fuel, cheaper food, and in general wsho oppose common sense and freeddom. Vote them out and the Republicans in. Stand up for God and Country. Thanks for your patience….now you all have a great day!
http://americanstance.org pweldon

(no further comment required)
spolson

I was under the belief that the majority was not strong enough to pass
and Obama passed it by executive order. Wasn’t that what the big stink about Scott taking Kennedy’s seat? someone correct me please.
thecommander

A new day has dawned in America as we now have a President who has declared himself above both the Supreme Court and the Congress of the United States. Obama has declared that he alone can declare the House or Senate in recess so he can make his apppointments without Congressional approval. Obama is now declaring that he alone should be able to determine the duties of the Sopreme Court and what may be examined for Constitutional review.

None of this should come as a suprise. I want to give a message to my fellow citizens:

WARNING! WE MAY NOT HAVE ANY ELECTIONS BECAUSE OBAMA AND THE DEMOCRATS KNOW THAT THE GOP IF ELECTED WILL STRIKE DOWN ALL OF WHAT THEY HAVE ENACTED TO CONTROL US.

There are still people who believe in Obama’s lies namely because they have not been negatively affected by them. Do not be decieved by Obama’s words look at his actions.

acat

do you think would put up with that nonsense?

Further, how much of the non-urban population would react well to a declaration of martial law?

Not seeing this as a viable threat.

Not saying Cloward-Piven isn’t possible, but .. there were elections during both World Wars, and even during the Civil War.

You’re vastly overestimating your opponent.

Mew

gwbramhall

Someone remind me. Didn’t they have to resor t
to the Louisiana Purchase and a raft of waiver s
to get the law passed and even then without
a single Republican vote. What kind of convincing
majority did this bill pass by that might qualify it
for immunity from Supreme Court review?

snowshooze

100% in fact…( I can’t remember, maybe a couple dissenters, because they had to…and it was granted to them )
Oh… he said Democratically elected?
Yep, every one of them. That is a majority too.
And because he threatened and bribed several of them, some of the others that threw in for free are kinda miffed about that too. They missed out on their payolla. Sore losers, them suckers.
Overwhelming. Hmmm…

shdwolf1

What scares me is that I would not be surprised to hear of a ?tragic accident? or ?untimely demise? from a heart attack or stroke, of a member of the Supreme Court that would allow Obama to stack the court in his favor.
I also would not be surprised, should he win reelection, if he finds a way to suspend the parts of the constitution that are a hindrance to him achieving his agenda. I would fully expect him to declare that 4 more years is not enough time to ?finish what he?s begun?, and he?ll fully throw out the election rules and declare himself our ruler for as long as it takes.
Getting rid of the Supreme Court, Republicans, the rich, and any who would dare oppose his vision; none of these scenarios are hard to imagine like they would have been a few short years ago.
bigboy46

I never thought I would ever say this about the President of the United States, but, here goes. The man is a rube. Every time he opens his mouth, the real America shudders. Yesterday is just one more example of no thought, no clue, just politics. As long as he agrees with what is happening, everything is just lovely. Due to the fact that his attorneys fell flat on their collective face in the Supreme Court arguments last week, now the SCOTUS is at fault if it sees fit to throw Obamacare on the trash heap of history. Couldn’t be that the buffoons in Congress who wrote this mess are at fault. Of course not. What a joke. I would laugh but the country is crying.
drbrum

Did president obama ever attend any of his law school classes . I can understand saying “present”‘when the roll was called but did be pay attention to what was being said in the lectures like he paid attention to Jeremiah White’s sermons? Every day be has been in office has convinced more and more Americans his resume like his birth certificate is a fraud! Hopefully the results of the November election will bring a resounding rejection of his anti- American, anti- Constitutional agenda.

snowshooze

This ought to snap him back to reality.

Jack_Savage

And that he had crammed last night for the presser today, but he dug the hole even deeper.

He knows just enough to be dangerous, but not enough to be smart.

snowshooze

And we can thank our President for that.
Every dog has his day, and today, we are the dog.
So… Obama…
Arf.

SoFiMil

The DOJ has to answer the question, but write a 3-page response, single-spaced.

http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis.rbml?pageType=politics&catid=57408827&feed_id=3&videofeed=39
drbrum

1. “Fast and Furious” Holder
2. “Present Sir” Obama
3. Both of the Above
4. None of the Above
mutantone

So why does he seem to for get the Judicial activist that stopped slavery which the democrats fought for.
Pingback: gsdfghsdkflhgksdfl
Pingback: Homepage
Pingback: look
Pingback: website
Pingback: wholesale nike air jordans
Pingback: sexy lady
Pingback: Watch Taken 2
Pingback: http://www.resident-evil-virus.de/mediawiki/index.php?title=Www.handymonkey.ca
Pingback: Extreme weight loss diet
Pingback: click here
Pingback: How to fight
Pingback: diablo 3 gold
Pingback: yoga weight loss
Pingback: Make money online
Pingback: lower your Taxes
Pingback: Mary Kay Intouch
Pingback: phen375 diet
Pingback: Marketing Digital
Pingback: Isabel Marant bottes
Pingback: sunglasses
Pingback: gaycamchat
Pingback: cheap viagra
Pingback: marble polishing aspen
Pingback: Download Quickbooks
Pingback: How To Make Youtube Videos
Pingback: make money fast online
Pingback: Mini Guitar
Pingback: article spinning software
Pingback: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrgCyCN264U
Pingback: Fusevision.com.sg seo basics
Pingback: Chilli Seeds
Pingback: Camere foto profesionale
Pingback: aranzacje wnetrz
Pingback: right here
Pingback: Extreme weight loss diet
Pingback: imitation goyard handbags
Pingback: KSL Squaw
Pingback: Going Here
Pingback: Homepage
Pingback: Universitas Terbaik
Pingback: Debbra Filpo
Pingback: paleo recipe book Review
Pingback: Burton Luebbe
Pingback: Discover More Here
Pingback: free online classifieds
Pingback: high intensity training
Pingback: leappad
Pingback: aparate foto profesionale
Pingback: ugg pas cher
Pingback: Make money Youtube video
Pingback: mastercard casino
Pingback: pain meds
Pingback: swissdent
Pingback: Going Here
Pingback: Rick Waltzer
Pingback: Ellis Clegg
Pingback: rank site SEO
Pingback: lainaa
Pingback: pond5 promotional code
Pingback: Scottie Coursey
Pingback: Nilda Zeman
Pingback: see
Pingback: sushi delivery Somerville ma
Pingback: Jeanna Locicero
Pingback: louboutin
Pingback: Ramon Mandrell
Pingback: seocu
Pingback: Thora Hirko
Pingback: Toby Biby
Pingback: cheap edu backlinks
Pingback: Dina Coteat
Pingback: Gale Chrosniak
Pingback: real estate dubai
Pingback: monoloop.com
Pingback: Google
Pingback: Auto Forum
Pingback: Welcome to My Blog
Pingback: Investment House
Pingback: umow sie na randke
Pingback: home distilling kits
Pingback: super randka
Pingback: spybubble
Pingback: best supplements for muscle gain
Pingback: Look At This
Pingback: Get the facts
Pingback: darmowa strona randki
Pingback: umow sie na randke
Pingback: electronics
Pingback: alternatives to steroids
Pingback: check site now
Pingback: Florencio Melchin
Pingback: legal steroids
Pingback: Stuart Iacovelli
Pingback: Trade Used Cars
Pingback: portal randkowy za darmo
Pingback: steel strapping
Pingback: portal randkowy za darmo
Pingback: public social
Pingback: battery tips
Pingback: umrah 2013
Pingback: stills
Pingback: Glen Rochholz
Pingback: charles david rowdy boot
Pingback: wedding planner toscana
Pingback: binaural astral projection
Pingback: estate agents glasgow
Pingback: rv warranty
Pingback: check my website
Pingback: Willetta Destefano
Pingback: gay
Pingback: read what he said
Pingback: spss training materials
Pingback: dr oz green coffee bean extracts
Pingback: escorts leeds.
Pingback: this hyperlink
Pingback: Why Not Find Out More
Pingback: You Could Try This Out
Pingback: gutters tampa florida
Pingback: Find Out More
Pingback: homes for sale in Indianapolis in
Pingback: rv warranty
Pingback: escorts leeds.
Pingback: supply chain disaster
Pingback: steam showers
Pingback: steam showers
Pingback: los angeles publicists
Pingback: people search
Pingback: people search,
Pingback: people search
Pingback: Tycoon World war Warcraft Gold Addon Review
Pingback: rv warranty
Pingback: Best Credit Repair
Pingback: swissdent
Pingback: breastactives pills
Pingback: web design barrow
Pingback: Rufus Kratowicz
Pingback: jeux,
Pingback: Cecil Gutzler
Pingback: beauty product
Pingback: PPI Claims
Pingback: PPI Claim
Pingback: PPI Claim
Pingback: PPI Claim
Pingback: lola
Pingback: PPI Claims
Pingback: PPI Claim
Pingback: toronto plumbing
Pingback: click site now
Pingback: mortgage help
Pingback: Colin Kaepernick
Pingback: Recommended Reading
Pingback: Lamps for sale
Pingback: PPI Claims
Pingback: PPI Claims
Pingback: Fuck you
Pingback: get more tumblr followers
Pingback: koleksi tas
Pingback: velkoborsky
Pingback: Nikon v2
Pingback: Orlando Web Design Company
Pingback: property in india
Pingback: Mileage Corrections
Pingback: viaggi per single
Pingback: sushi catering boston
Pingback: madamlux
Pingback: Jim Dannatt
Pingback: desain interior rumah
Pingback: garage doors melbourne
Pingback: garage doors perth
Pingback: Make Money Youtube
Pingback: the stables towneley park
Pingback: Carlo Wydeven
Pingback: casino,
Pingback: optical manufacturer
Pingback: cheap bridal wedding dresses
Pingback: nike free 3 running
Pingback: Savannah Weinhold
Pingback: Omar Skelton
Pingback: Darwin Glatt
Pingback: mca motor club of america
Pingback: lecteur carte vitale
Pingback: Remote Control
Pingback: Store Display Installations
Pingback: amarillo tree
Pingback: amarillo tree.
Pingback: amarillo tree
Pingback: verificagru
Pingback: Delta Mclafferty
Pingback: loans & bad credit
Pingback: Colton Foshee
Pingback: sms gratis
Pingback: Welcome to My Blog
Pingback: ipage affiliate
Pingback: employment
Pingback: african mango reviews
Pingback: Elvis Robbin
Pingback: Sidney Trundy
Pingback: upmc insurance prices
Pingback: aloe vera juice for hair
Pingback: Cucciolo Rottweiler
Pingback: buy real active instagram followers
Pingback: Dumpster Deliveries
Pingback: 123 mold testing
Pingback: backlinks
Pingback: mls inmobiliarias
Pingback: Chain Link Fence
Pingback: wzór cv
Pingback: Deliver my Dumpster
Pingback: fashion jeans
Pingback: dualcore
Pingback: Blaine Cafe
Pingback: startoptions
Pingback: startoption
Pingback: startoption
Pingback: buy african mango
Pingback: free annual credit report
Pingback: DayZ Items
Pingback: work from home
Pingback: Investing Offshore
Pingback: harrisburg personal training
Pingback: john thomas financial
Pingback: junk car towing milwaukee
Pingback: High Fashion
Pingback: Low Cost Web Hosting services with affordable domain name host provider
Pingback: john thomas financial
Pingback: More Info
Pingback: cheap cell phone service
Pingback: bear grylls messer
Pingback: online casino free bets
Pingback: how to make money online
Pingback: safari sam slots review
Pingback: cheapest car insurance quotes
Pingback: pirater facebook
Pingback: lol corki guide
Pingback: hushållsservice
Pingback: Seattle Janitorial
Pingback: harvard
Pingback: chaise eames
Pingback: Seattle Janitorial Service
Pingback: sofy rozkładane
Pingback: Janitorial Services Seattle
Pingback: Height Adjustable Desk
Pingback: good read
Pingback: 2013 Wedding dresses
Pingback: Rosetta Toguchi
Pingback: travel
Pingback: Harley Dyse
Pingback: GYROTONIC
Pingback: Kush Los Angeles
Pingback: buy my car scam
Pingback: Kristian Medler
Pingback: hair loss treatment for women
Pingback: natural depersonalization treatment
Pingback: online casino bonus
Pingback: gigi spice pics
Pingback: slot demo from net entertainment
Pingback: Sail Croatia
Pingback: wholesale distributors health & beauty
Pingback: lida ile zayiflama
Pingback: Eleonore Rhodd
Pingback: Site
Pingback: shoz tech
Pingback: online forex trading broker system
Pingback: capitol heights locksmith
Pingback: Hisako Rozar
Pingback: Flag and medal display cases
Pingback: window media player updates for vista
Pingback: wellnesshotel
Pingback: kitchen designs
Pingback: easy to get mounts in wow

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

President Obama Goes on Record Opposing Marbury v. Madison

COMMENTS

ALL

COMMENTS

POPULAR

#RSRH

PICK YOUR STATE & GET LOCAL